Texas trying to ban sodomy.... AGAIN?

[incogweedo]

well it's late.. the title says it all, so im not going to say a whole lot.

just tell me what you think about this bullshit, ill join the conversation tomorrow afternoon. But hey, it's the right-wing cowboy land of Texas, it's not that surprising that they would do this. Too bad that they dont get it; they're trying to ban anal and oral sex, and sodomy has nothing to do with sexuality.

I'm sorry for any leftist that live in the state, i hear it's really nice, minus the zealot cowboys there and the ultra-right.
also, lets not let the acts of the Texas Republican Party reflect the entire state, some really cool people come from Texas.

nydailynews (dot) com/news/2010/06/22/2010-06-22_texas_gop_platform_criminalize_gay_marriage_and _ban_sodomy_outlaw_strip_clubs_an.html

[incogweedo]

ohh, i forgot. I know this is sorta old news, like a week or so, but i haven't seen any threads on this yet, so no raging please :P

[Foldered]

Well, sodomy does have everything to do with sexuality, but whether you think it is "wrong" (morally or whatever) or "right" doesn't have to do with sexuality. I think it's a disgrace, really. Nobody has the right to say that you cannot do something sexually if it's in consentual circumstances.

This doesn't only marginalize the gay community (which would be entirely ridiculous in its own right-- if they simply banned non-heterosexual sex), but it marginalizes the entire sexual community. I imagine (if they ban sodomy, as in anal and oral and contraceptive--which was originaly included in definitions of sodomy back in the day--sex) I would have been electric chaired years ago, and I'm a (mostly) white heterosexual male*!

*Not that that changes how ridiculous it is or anything, I'm only saying that I'm essentially who these laws are attempting to protect.

[XxKrebsxX]

These laws have already been proven unconstitutional in Lawrence vs Texas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

So basically, they're trying to pass these laws when their predecessors have already been ruled unconstitutional.

[Robocommie]

How the hell does one even enforce a ban on oral or anal sex?

[Revy]

These laws have already been proven unconstitutional in Lawrence vs Texas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

So basically, they're trying to pass these laws when their predecessors have already been ruled unconstitutional.

South Dakota tried to ban abortion, so, just because they legally can't doesn't mean they won't try. That's why they're far-right wackos, they hate the Supreme Court, because of all the progress that has been made through Supreme Court rulings......

[XxKrebsxX]

How the hell does one even enforce a ban on oral or anal sex?

They can't really. Unless bust down the door to your house and catch you in the act ala Lawrence vs. Texas.

[Revy]

How the hell does one even enforce a ban on oral or anal sex?

When Texas tried to re-enforce it in 2003 they were only applying it to homosexual sex.

They don't care about heterosexual oral and anal, they don't. That's why they're homophobic, they are trying to oppress gays with any ban on sodomy.

[Robocommie]

They can't really. Unless bust down the door to your house and catch you in the act ala Lawrence vs. Texas.

This law remains an idiotic waste of time, I'd like to see the "small government" conservatives explain how this is worth the utter waste in taxpayer time and money. That said, wouldn't the ruling found by the courts in Lawrence vs. Texas make all laws trying to do the same thing unconstitutional?

I was reading about this on Wikipedia after you mentioned it, and reading the part on Dissents reminded me of just how truly awe-inspiring the reactionary, fascistic depths that that awful little trollperson, Antonin Scalia, will go.

Edit: I just saw you had already posted exactly this, except for the bit about Antonin Scalia. I need to pay more attention. lol

[danyboy27]

How the hell does one even enforce a ban on oral or anal sex?
http://img.diytrade.com/cdimg/449647/4038222/0/1185528381/For_Men_Lady_s_Sex_Chastity_Belt.jpg

[incogweedo]

Well, sodomy does have everything to do with sexuality, but whether you think it is "wrong" (morally or whatever) or "right" doesn't have to do with sexuality. I think it's a disgrace, really. Nobody has the right to say that you cannot do something sexually if it's in consentual circumstances.

This doesn't only marginalize the gay community (which would be entirely ridiculous in its own right-- if they simply banned non-heterosexual sex), but it marginalizes the entire sexual community. I imagine (if they ban sodomy, as in anal and oral and contraceptive--which was originaly included in definitions of sodomy back in the day--sex) I would have been electric chaired years ago, and I'm a (mostly) white heterosexual male*!

*Not that that changes how ridiculous it is or anything, I'm only saying that I'm essentially who these laws are attempting to protect.


I meant sodomy is oral and anal sex, regardless of sexuality. No more blowjobs for cowboys :( i guess their homosexuality came back to haunt them.

[GPDP]

Eh, if anything, I'd say these kinds of laws are introduced explicitly to pander to the conservative Christian homophobes that make up much of the Texas Republican Party's base. Chances are they know such a law would get shot down; at least they can go to their bigot voters and say "hell, we tried! Vote for us if you want us to keep trying to drive back the sodomist agenda!"

[XxKrebsxX]

Eh, if anything, I'd say these kinds of laws are introduced explicitly to pander to the conservative Christian homophobes that make up much of the Texas Republican Party's base. Chances are they know such a law would get shot down; at least they can go to their bigot voters and say "hell, we tried! Vote for us if you want us to keep trying to drive back the sodomist agenda!"

Sadly, I think you are spot on. I really doubt some of these elected officials are this fucking stupid in their beliefs rather than they play a charade for their bigot base.